Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Cindy S. HINDS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. WAL-MART STORES, INC., Defendant-Respondent.
Plaintiff commenced this action seeking damages for injuries that she sustained when a box containing a television set fell from a pallet and struck her in the back of her left leg. We agree with plaintiff that Supreme Court erred in denying her motion seeking partial summary judgment on the issues of defendant's liability and her alleged comparative negligence. Plaintiff was a customer in defendant's store at the time of the accident, and defendant thus owed plaintiff a duty to maintain its premises in a reasonably safe condition (see Kellman v. 45 Tiemann Assoc., 87 N.Y.2d 871, 872, 638 N.Y.S.2d 937, 662 N.E.2d 255). Plaintiff met her initial burden on her motion of establishing the breach of that duty by showing that defendant's employees negligently transported the television set on the pallet without tying it down and thereby allowed the television set to fall from the pallet, causing plaintiff's injuries. Plaintiff further met her burden of establishing her entitlement to judgment as a matter of law on the issue of her alleged comparative negligence by establishing that the television set struck her from behind, without any warning from defendant's employees or, indeed, from any other persons. Defendant failed to raise an issue of fact to defeat the motion (see generally Zuckerman v. City of New York, 49 N.Y.2d 557, 562, 427 N.Y.S.2d 595, 404 N.E.2d 718; Earl v. Adducci, 43 A.D.3d 1286, 842 N.Y.S.2d 643).
It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is unanimously reversed on the law without costs and the motion is granted.
MEMORANDUM:
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Decided: June 06, 2008
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)